Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

fluffy666

Members
  • Posts

    10,124
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by fluffy666

  1. The likeliest is that when there is loss of land then food prices start going up, malnutrition and famines then act as the natural population reducers that they always have. The poorest countries will suffer the worst and this will continue until a lower global population carrying level is reached. Malthus.

    Try the link I posted earlier about sea level rise maps.. then put it to +7 meters and look at what happens to China.

    Oops. Do we really need Shanghai?

  2. That study says 200 - 900 years before the effects kick in which far exceeds the expected life of any house being built today so there's no need to ban building within a few metres of sea level.

    Building on flood plains is another matter because it adversely affects existing settlements downstream. If there aren't any and somebody wants to buy a house that gets flooded every winter then who am I to stop them?

    I was thinking more infrastructure - Some of our main railway routes are well over 100 years old, and even things like motorways and airports should be expected to be around for over 100+ years.

    Which is interesting for the idea of a Boris Island airport.

    As far as flood plains go.. It should be far more explicit. As in 'This new development expects to be flooded out every 20 years, and more often under most global warming scenarios'. That would focus minds.

  3. The deficit has roughly halved. Granted all means should be sought to raise tax revenue without damaging other parts of the economy, but if public sector workers are overpaid then I still don't see moral support for your position

    That's a very, very broad definition of 'Half'. I'd prefer 'A third at best'.

    My position is that the continual barrage of claims that the public sector is stuffed full of highly-paid people doing non-jobs who could be sacked tomorrow with no effects is basically made-up.

    And the claim that the public sector suddenly had a massive expansion under Labour (Including bank bailouts is just daft). As above, public sector employment was at a low ebb in 2000 and at peak it was below the levels seen under Ms T.

    To me, it's just the lazy repetition of propaganda.

  4. Perhaps appetite for debt would diminish if we did away with limited liability companies and the benefit system that guarantees you'll be looked after when you've lost your shirt. The system we have rewards risk takers when they make the right decisions and protects them when they don't. In short, there is no risk, nanny will take care of you.

    The whole idea of LLCs, as well as bankruptcy laws and a basic welfare state is that it frees people to go out and innovate, create businesses and the like without the fear that if anything goes wrong, they'll be on the street.

    Indeed, it's cited as a reason why small business formation rates are lower in the US - quit your job, lose medical coverage.

    The real problem is the misuse of LLCs to extract cash and go bankrupt deliberately, and of course banks recklessly lending for house purchase.

  5. I looked at the ice sheet link, it say 60cm rise, not quote 6M. As to the wash, I always though that we should adopt the Dutch approach ad out a barrage across it? Build a few dykes and windmill/pumps and reclaim the land, as has been suggested a few times before by various engineers. We could then build a new city of a few million people in Cambridgeshire with no loss of farming land

    The Thwaites glacier on it's own is 60cm, the rest of the ice sheet adds the rest. The WAIS has collapsed previously with little apparent provocation.

  6. It is crap. The top menu bar appears randomly after a few seconds. But for a while you're looking wondering what to click next.

    I used to buy their footgloves shoes cos they were comfy. Then they changed were they were made, they were crap and didn't last as long and they had the cheek to put the price up.

    I had an altercation a few years ago when some shoes fell apart (soles broke up) within a few weeks of ownership. Took them back, was accused of 'misusing' them and eventually, and grudgingly given a refund.

    Given that, as an Englishman I hate complaining, this was traumatic. Never again..

  7. Well, let's put it like this..

    It's been confirmed that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet has been destabilized , which means we are committed to at least 6 meters of sea level rise. We are seeing significant increases in floods through extreme events and droughts. And things are not going to get better..

    The timeline is currently uncertain, but we could easily see a large chunk of that during this century.

    Basically, building any new infrastructure within 10 meters of sea level should be banned. Building houses on flood plains - without putting them on stilts or taking other anti-flood measures - should be banned.

    You can see how it may affect you (or at least your descendants) by looking here:

    http://flood.firetree.net/

    I'm interested to see how they are planning to deal with the Wash expanding as far as Cambridge. Or why we are even thinking of spending money on the Somerset Levels.

  8. Bottom line.

    Companies are generally shit at running things, banks even worse - can you image the cost of running some of these portfolios if they were done so legitimitately with all the associated isnurances, H&S checks etc etc tht should be in place.

    This is kite flying a sale of the portfolio, in a breathless sky.

    This is probably the most shocking thing.. If I had a 'portfolio' of 1000 houses, you'd want to manage it as a business - you'd have full-time people for repairs, maintenance and cleaning, compliance, answering the phone.. Put the debt on a commercial footing and make it a limited company so that you are not on the hook for millions if it all goes FUBAR.

    But I suppose they know better.

  9. The credit impulse from FLS/HtB appears to have exhausted itself. Simple enough to predict. Remember, It's credit acceleration that most closely corresponds with changes in economic output not the stock of outstanding debt. A much weaker H2 2014 GDP print is now indicated unless Osborne borrows more than forecast in his spring budget.

    But he is a Man of Austerity and Seriousness and Stuff and so won't even think of going on an unfunded pre-election splurge.

  10. Ive been interested in a plot of land in that has outline planning permission for a 2 Bedroom house, around 70m2.

    Now ive got all the documentation off the vendors solicitor and the Section 106 fees are £24,800 for a 2 bed, and if i was to alter the plans and build a 3 bed it costs £33,310.

    And there was someone on here yesterday telling me planning departments and councils are not parasites.

    A 2 bed in this street was selling for 150K only 2 years ago.

    i am truly stunned that they can get away with charging this.

    No, planning departments are required. Planning law is stupid in this country.

  11. Blair was for huge government and taxing people to the hilt, that is left wing .... or as thats nasty is it right wing? as thats how your ilk think isnt it, Left is good, Right is bad!

    I gave you an example of where there is a mass of parasitic public sector workers in non jobs, i didnt realise my response was supposed to be indepth research giving exact numbers. Doesnt it strike you that 25% of Council tax goes to pensions alone that something is deeply wrong and has been for a long long time.

    Maybe if you had the ability to make enough money in the private sector via work alone you'd also not like paying for endless parasites in the planning department, dictating to you that you cant build a house as their are a few f'en newts on the land.

    You want to abolish planning departments entirely? OK with that industrial scale pig farm being built next door right up to the boundary? And if not then some of those people, at least, are not doing 'non-jobs'.

    Numbers are handy. Without them you are just repeating propaganda. If I wrote a post saying 'Here's a couple of examples of house prices going up, therefore all house prices always go up, QED' would you accept that?

    I work in the private sector, to the extent that I'm probably a net contributor of tax even with kids in school. But there you go.

  12. That's a very scary chart for anyone who is a FTB in their mid-30s onwards. Or anyone who has an IO mortgage. I strongly suspect that drop at the end is the classic 'Had the same job for 20 years, just got downsized and have a permanent wage cut' cliff.

    Part of my 'plan' (such that it is) is to make sure I have the house paid off by my early 50s as well as a decent pension fund, because I can see this happening to me. Which means staying lucky for at least another decade..

  13. Indeed you should always check where the zero axis is but the chart still shows a steep increase since 2000. Especially upto 2005 - and by 2010 there were nearly 6.4 million an increase of about 800,000 during the period since 2000 which is a significant increase (about 19%). Rather than, for example, remaining flat or even reducing.

    The UK population grew by about 5% in that time (58.5 million to 61.6 million)

    Except that the jump to 2010 includes the banks. Apples and oranges, and it's not like there isn't a helpful arrow pointing it out.

    If you find more historical data, you also find that public sector employment was at a low point in 2000. Especially with per-capita adjustment, we are still nowhere near the levels attained by that noted communitarian, Thatcher..

    http://www.tutor2u.net/blog/index.php/economics/comments/cities-dependent-on-the-public-sector

  14. Why do you seem to think its "right wingers" who are for the crony capitalism you describe? Its was under Blairites that this reached epic proportions.

    But just because google doesnt pay tax doesnt make it right that their are endless public sector non jobs at mid to lower level that need ending tomorrow.

    Just look at all the oxygen thieves that are involved in stopping us getting planning permission, you seem to think i should fund their parasitic lifestyle.

    Blair was left wing? Hmmm.. yes, that campaign of renationalisation, taxing the rich, regulating capital and building social goods gave it away, didn't it?

    As for the rest of your comment, this is exactly the point I am making. Vague arm waving about 'public sector non-jobs' without any numbers. Sorry, doesn't cut it.

  15. An interesting link about the number of public sector workers in the UK.

    There's a chart going back to 2000 showing the steep increase in public sector workers since then and also a "sharp rise" in 2008/2009 with a lot of banking sector employees being counted as public sector after the UK's latest economic calamity with several banks being nationalised.

    So does that mean that those banking sector employees' wages will be similarly restricted until 2018. Will they be going on strike as well.

    I suspect one knows the answer to those questions - bonuses and all.

    2000 = 5.5 million

    2005 = 6.1 million.

    That is an increase - perhaps 2% a year, although less on a per-capita basis because population has gone up quite a bit over the lifetime of that graph. Always check where the zero axis is..

  16. I can see the strike having a negative impact on GDP and CPI, pushing us closer to deflation. Not much actual productivity will be lost other than some private sector workers having to take time off; however, will definitely have a knock on effect with public sector workers spending less presumably.

    PSBR should be assisted, but that's the point it will still be a massive deficit even with the savings made on strikers' wages. We all want jam today on the grandkids' future earnings because we are all selfish. Benefits and public sector wages in excess of taxation is what we expect, it's the post world war two deal where we assume future generations will have fatter wallets.

    Ignoring, of course, the huge issue of tax evasion/avoidance on top of the general tax giveaways to the wealthy. Funny enough, that's not the allowed narrative for the right-wingers of the world. Most of whom seem convinced that government could be slashed tomorrow (and this slashing would have zero knock on effects), but are utterly incapable of identifying serious targets for this slashing.

    It's classic 'Overton window' stuff. We cannot discuss tax rises for the rich. We cannot discuss actual stimulus programs (apart from 'give cheap money to banks', which really dosen't seem to work). We cannot discuss multinationals avoiding tax. All we are allowed to talk about is just how nasty we can get towards mid-to-lower band public sector workers and the unemployed. Well, we've been punching them for the last few years and the deficit is still sky high. Obviously not punching enough.

  17. If the western press points to China as being the black swan then start looking in the opposite direction.

    For example look for a country now being touted by politicians and the media as being a massive success story, claiming rapid growth (like a tiger economy) and also claiming to be recovering faster from the latest economic calamity than any other country around the globe.

    It's just a matter of identifying that country.

    Indeed, a China collapse would be about as white as white swans go.. everyone and their kid sister has been predicting it for most of the last decade.

    Could be something more like a major el Nino event that knocks harvests worldwide by 30+%.

    Or the long threatened Saudi Arabian coup..

    Or a sudden and unexpected bankruptcy in the shale oil/gas sector..

  18. Why would anyone seek to commit themselves to a debt that requires working until they are 70 ?

    So, you reach 70 and finally retire, and say "honey, these bricks are ours".

    and then drop dead.

    When will people stand back and realise ?

    Direct quote:

    I think that if you are expected to work to 70,you should reap some blummin benefits ! It's a grim enough prospect, as it is !

    No...borrowing even more money is not a benefit..

  19. That's not really supported by the example. A 38k student debt would cost something like $100 a month to service. You'd have to be seriously down on on your luck to not be able to pay that much for what clearly would have been several years. Of course, today's students are looking at repaying very substantially more than that.

    That depends if the lender is willing to take IO payments. Sounds like the lender in question wasn't.

  20. Being cheap does not mean it's good value.

    This is about the same price for a 4br house not to far away - actually it's that cheap I might go and have a look.

    http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-29684724.html

    Bring a brush for the chalk outlines.

    Even that place is the kind of house that not that long ago would have gone for a near-nominal sum because you'd need either a lot of time or a lot of money to make it properly liveable.

  21. and to help the unemployment figures, to boost banking's lending figures and to give way to cheap overseas workers etc. Somehow these days it just doesn't seem to rhyme that much with Aristotle at the Athenian Lyceum.

    You see, in theory the march of technology displacing jobs should mean:

    - Longer education before going into the workforce

    - Shorter working hours

    - Earlier retirement.

    So more students should be fine, without student loans.

    The fact that if anything these trends are going backwards - and we are apparently setting records for the number of people in employment - suggests that something is very, very f***ed up with economics nowadays..

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.